Met Police Audit: 2019 Markle Letter Discrepancy

A discrepancy in the timeline of a complaint against Thomas Markle has prompted an internal review by London's Metropolitan Police. The conflict centers on whether a letter detailing allegations about the Duchess of Sussex's father arrived at Scotland Yard in 2018 or 2019. This timeline gap has emerged as the central issue in the current investigation into how the matter was processed.

The Met confirmed on Saturday that it received the document in 2019. A spokesperson stated the letter contained a number of claims regarding Markle. Police forwarded the document to the office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for their awareness. The specific details of the allegations were not shared with other law enforcement agencies at that time.

Meghan Markle's statement issued on Friday places the initial contact in 2018. She said a letter was sent to the Metropolitan Police and Royalty and Specialist Protection that year. The statement noted that she was later given the document, which made troubling and disturbing allegations against her father. She claimed she was assured the claims were being investigated.

The two accounts differ by one year. Meghan's spokesman addressed the gap in comments to BBC News. He described any discrepancy of a few months as an understandable consequence of the passage of time. The Met will now review how the 2019 handling occurred and decide if it needs to refer the case to the police watchdog.

The confirmation follows reports this week that Thomas Markle Jr. reported his father to authorities in the Philippines. The younger Markle alleged he found child abuse materials in storage boxes at the family home. Philippine authorities began dealing with Markle over alleged possession of those materials on Friday. Markle denied the allegations in a report by The Daily Mail that same day.

Meghan said she has known of the allegations since 2018. She stated she kept her distance from her father to protect her children. She said her decision to limit contact had one reason, which was to protect them. She noted that media publications had distorted this rationale over the years.